Experiential marketing remains a viable path to success. Are in-store demos the only way to achieve this? No. But if you look at the success of Costco and its successful demonstrations and in-store sampling, you cannot dismiss this as a path to consider. Sure there will be limited opportunities to reach the masses, but the halo effect of such efforts has proven successful in building shopper loyalty, creating in-store theater and driving brand familiarity.

Although it may not be for all, I’m a fan of in-store demos and feel this creates in-store excitement and differentiation. For now, I’d say keep in part of the mix until a new method emerges that puts samples in customers’ hands more effectively while keeping the spotlight on the brand. Can’t wait to see what is “in store” for our future!

I think it’s the latter — while effective, demos reach only a small subset of potential buyers and so cost-per-conversion must be relatively high. I wonder, though, how much goodwill a vendor buys when they are part of a store’s demo program. Does it get that extra product in the store? More consideration for something the vendor wants to do down the road?

Demos are among the easiest thing for vendors to test and measure since they can naturally happen in some stores and not others. That makes this an answerable question, brand-by-brand, rather than a theoretical question.

For most retailers demos are a profit center, but that is not the problem. Some products will never demo well no matter what. For others it is the people who are poorly trained, lack knowledge and have no idea what their objectives are. What is wrong is when a vendor is just going through the motion to feed another retailer profit center. Answer some simple questions. Is this a product that should be demoed? How many cases must a demo sell to break even? Have you gotten the best person for the task? Does the product target market match the store’s actual customers?

I agree that “Mabel with a table” demos are not very efficient and sometimes even a waste of money. However, TPRs and coupons aren’t a good substitute.

What’s good about sampling:

• Immediate, free trial of product;
• Proximity to purchase opportunity;
• Interruption of trip mission.

The question is, what else could we use to replicate these benefits? How else can we simulate these deliverables?

Surely unmanned sampling is one option. Perhaps there could be a kind of sampling machine to dole out fresh product and shut down after so many hours.

The store is an extremely attractive touch point with customers: in-store demos represent an effective promotional tool for both vendors and retailer.

When done well, with Costco being exemplary, in-store demos are a powerful mechanism to stimulate trial and create awareness for the vendor. For the retailer, they emphasize a multi-sensory and differentiated shopping experience that influences the in-store purchase decision.

As to the truth, reality here depends on operations of the specific retail chain and the vendors’ marketing budget. Each one defines and measures success differently, but maybe if both take the longer view with the shopper as the starting point, they may find more commonalities than not.

The existing demo methodologies are poorly conceived and I have to agree with Tony on how important correctly trained, enthusiastic people are to the existing process.

Without turning into a commercial for our interactive sampling technology, there are other smarter, more measurable, more engaging ways to go about sampling, especially for Millennials, than “Mabel with a table.” Stores and brands simply have to decide to rethink what isn’t working and open their minds.

Demos at Trader Joe’s and Costco are sure better than those at Amazon.com … If brick-and-mortar retailing is “at risk,” demos offer an important point of differentiation. And not just food — cosmetics, fashion ideas, speaker systems, etc. So if this is the case, retailers are foolish if they don’t promote promos, even as a break-even.

Selling price and free samples just don’t add up to a lot of profit for the provider side of the business. Packaging, as in trial sizes and coupons, works well when properly managed.

Retailers have created high barriers to doing the demos—fees, exclusive providers, etc. I believe quality of demos has dropped—again, neither retailers nor manufacturers want to pay for high-quality personnel. It’s a case of you get what you pay for.

I believe “demos” can be effective. However, not everyone is cut out to be a promotional sales specialist. I agree the “Mable with a Table” is less effective and possibly a waist of money. However, the professional sales specialist with the correct training on customer engagement, knowledge of product, and the ability to execute a demo is well worth the money and will see a increase in sales. The issue lies within the retailer having a working relationship not only with the Demo Team but, also within it own Corporate office. Lack of communication caused “Demo” being executed on product the store does not currently have in stock and therefore is ineffective.

Bottom line is that upper management, whether at the retailer level or vendor level, needs to ensure the person assigned to the demo have what they need because if they don’t, they can not execute a successful event and then it was a waist of everyone’s time and money.

I would say this is the reason for most failed demos.

The answer is both. Retailers are guilty of turning every facet of marketing promotion into profit centers, and vendors have not spent the time or thinking space to see if they can transform the demo into something more. With the right thinking, demos can be transformed into events in the store, rather than just a person sampling. Of course, many grocers will not permit such activity, seeking just to “take the money and run,” but some will. And if manufacturers can document the success of such events in growing trial of a category, not just brand shifting, then other retailers may jump on board.

The quote in this discussion article that struck me was “Retailers seem to understand vendor frustration with demos, but say that demos need to be improved rather than discontinued.” This really rings true for me.

For most vendors, there is very little insight into demo execution and results. As the CEO of a mobile data collection platform, we have customers that use our app to eliminate these blind spots. By setting specific goals for each demo and then tracking those metrics in-store, vendors can get a better understanding as to whether each demo was successful or not.

On the execution side, mobile data collection can help management to see how a demo went. Geo-tagging, time-stamping and actual photos of the demo area, signage, and marketing collateral can also give insight as to why one in-store demo was successful while another was not.

By getting better insight into demo execution and setting specific goals for each demo and tracking those metrics, vendors’ in-store demos can be greatly improved.